Creationist Admins

This topic looks like a good place to post my "manifesto" on what I view this forum to be, and how it should be operated. This, however, will take some time to put together.Some short answers right now:In the earlier days, we did have two (real) creationist admins. For whatever reason, they chose to not be active as admins, and thus were discontinued as admins. One of those (TrueCreation) has since largely converted to the evo side, and in general has been pretty inactive here. The other (Tranquility Base) has long ago entirely dropped from sight.This site is not a democracy. Percy, who owns it and pays all the bills, is a benevolent dictator, and the other admins strive to support his aims.The core of this forum is that it is a forum of scientific discussion. Hard core creationism is inherently unscientific (of course, a debate topic in itself). Stated perhaps differently, this place is intended as a place for scientific debate between science and non-science. As such, I'm rather amazed that it works at all.IMO, the main problem with a (real) creationist admin, is that I see hard core creationists to be inherently irrational. Having admin status includes considerable power, much of which, by forum policy, is never used. Irrational behaviour could result in truly massive distruction.By the time a "real" creationist is judged to have achieved a safe level of rationality, s/he is no longer a "real" creationist.OK, maybe I ended up covering a fair bit (most?) of the "manifesto". We shall see what others have to say.Adminnemooseus

The two modes go 3300+ messages - Get POTM for that one.Buzsaw gave me the POTM. Since his comments are relivent to this topic, I will quote his message:

quote:

---

Minnemooseous:
Suggestions and Questions Forum
Topic: Creationist Admins
Message 2

​

By the time a "real" creationist is judged to have achieved a safe level of rationality, s/he is no longer a "real" creationist.

​

Moose tells it like it is and seems to administrate justly regardless of one's ideology.

​

I cite his above quote for pom because it fingers the problem true creationists face in debating the minority viewpoint which factors in the supernatural. As chief admin, he seems to understand this handicap of true creationists.

​

{Made the "2" a link - AM}

​

This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-13-2004 10:22 PM

---

I'll here add one comment, that I've said before somewhere, but didn't put into message 2:It is understandably difficult for a creationist to operate as a moderator. S/he is a minority member in a hostle environment. [non-admin mode]The problem (and very core problem of creationism vs. evolution) is that science by definition does not allow one to "factor in the supernatural" into a scientific dabate. But that has been hit upon many times in many topics - Indeed is probably the basis of the "Is It Science?" forum.[/non-admin mode]I guess it's moments like this that Buzsaw seems like admin material. But, again, there's the comment above the above quote box.Perhaps Buz would like to pursue the discussion further, in a "Great Debate" topic? I could use a variation of what I've said so far in this topic, as the launching point. Or pehaps Buz would like to run a "Great Debate" proposal through the "Proposed New Topics" forum?Cheers,
(the sometimes cranky, but not this time) Adminnemooseus

quote:

---

The admin doesn't have to be a 'hard core' creationist--just somebody who the creationists respect as able to see their side well, and willing to 'go against the evos.'

---

We do have the very inactive (busy in the real world) AdminTL (aka AdminTruthlover). He had left creationism behind him long before arriving at . But I do think he was much liked and respected by all sides here.You can get the short list of his most recent messages here. To get a (maybe) longer list you need to go to the search page, and enter AdminTL into the "Search by User Name" field (no way for me to supply link to results page). You may be able to get more messages listed by doing individual forum searches. You also may find it interesting to do a truthlover search (make sure you start name with lower case "t").As far as "seeing their side" - I can see that they're at a severe disatvantage in their debate arsenal. Mainstream science is mainstream because that's where the ammunition is.Re: "going against the evos" - I am pretty confident that I've had more evo side debaters pissed off at me, than any other admin. I think I have the attitude that since creationism is inherently scientificly irrational, they must to some degree be excused for presenting irrational messages - OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. All that said, I still would like to do a "Great Debate" discussion with Buzsaw, on this general topic. I do think he is the best candidate for the position of "real creationist admin".Adminnemooseus

I prefer not to do such discussions in the public forums.Adminnemooseus

For the record, the message he was replying to was message 41 of this topic.Rationaliy comes in degrees. Sometimes it comes and goes completely. Sometimes my general perception of creationist rationality is tainted by certain extreme examples.I continue to rationalize that your messages are worthy of reply.In general, the blather content of your message is a testiment to your irrationality. I am open to opinion from other members, regardless of the side of the debate they are on, that my judgement is incorrect.Stop your whining.Adminnemooseus

quote:

---

...perhaps you could give something more substantial than your ad hoc personal and subjective opinion.

---

Well, if you insist.Adminnemooseus

This topic actually started out as a pretty good discussion of the problems of having creationist admins at this forum (See page 1 for a review).I certainly don't hold Ken DeMyer as being representative of all creationists. Members like Ken actually might be one of the greatest reasons why having a creationist admin would be nice. The "AdminCreo" might feel freer to come down on the likes of Ken, earlier and/or harder than an evo side moderator.Per the earlier mentioned idea of a "Buz/Moose" "Great Debate" - As was the case with the never happened "Frog/Moose" "GD", I'm not really looking for a real hard core debate. Rather, the "GD" format would permit a nice calm one on one discussion of the creationist admin issue. I Think I will put the idea on the back burner for now, unless Buz really likes the idea.In general, I've tried to push the idea of more "Great Debates". The "GD" format restrictions would be the one sure way of preventing "pile on the creo".Adminnemooseus